We performed a comparison between Amazon API Gateway and SwaggerHub based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."In terms of scalability, I haven't encountered any issues with API Gateway. We've significantly increased our traffic from hitting it once or twice a minute to now hitting it ten to fifteen times within a minute. In an hour, we're receiving hundreds of hits. So, it's performing excellently."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is it has lots of integration."
"Amazon API Gateway is a very fast solution."
"The initial setup is pretty easy. Deployment only takes five minutes."
"It's flexible. It was valuable."
"The solution is a managed service and requires minimal configuration, which makes it easy to launch an API."
"Amazon stack is easy to use in combination with other Amazon services, so it was a logical continuity."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."
"Code generation is one of the important features of SwaggerHub. We design our API, and we can generate a very rich codebase and add to it. The code generation feature is very valuable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."
"The scalability is endless."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."
"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."
"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."
"Its support for SAM integration could be made more accessible."
"The only real problem is that you have to know a lot about what is outside of the API gateway in order to make the best use of it."
"We faced a few issues with the documentation."
"When working with XML payloads, there can be issues due to the lack of a seamless connection between API Gateway and Lambda functions."
"I am not completely satisfied with Technical Support."
"The solution could improve signature validation."
"If I take into consideration the past three to four years, during which I used the tool, I would say that some missing and external configurations were not possible in the product, and it was a bit difficult to manage."
"We would like to see more UI-based monitoring."
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"SwaggerHub lacks in terms of integrations. They have APIs integrated, and they also have some connectors, but they don't have integration with many of the things that we use. For example, for connecting with SVN, we had to implement external scripts. So, they should work on the integration because currently, we have to work on the integration with our DevOps, continuous delivery, or continuous deployment. It would be great if these integrations are built-in. Mainly, we would like it to integrate with SVN and Jira."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."
Amazon API Gateway is ranked 3rd in API Management with 37 reviews while SwaggerHub is ranked 16th in API Management with 10 reviews. Amazon API Gateway is rated 8.2, while SwaggerHub is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Amazon API Gateway writes "Easy initial setup and highly stable solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwaggerHub writes "Simplifies API design and development for developers". Amazon API Gateway is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Apigee, WSO2 API Manager and Kong Gateway Enterprise, whereas SwaggerHub is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, RapidAPI and Stoplight. See our Amazon API Gateway vs. SwaggerHub report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.